Earth Shaking Tragedy… Why?

Posted by Larry Miller on January 25, 2010 under How, Why | Be the First to Comment

On the heals of the tragic Haitian earthquake the world was shocked at the scope of the human suffering on the western end of that small island. Talking heads moaned and groaned about the misery… reporting, telling stories, but doing little to make the situation better. More recently, Sean Penn joined the chorus telling us about things we already knew from the evening news. No one had any idea of why such misfortune should fall upon such an already impoverished country.

One exception was Pat Robertson, a meticulous student of, not only the Bible, but of history as well. He knows that to comprehend the present, we must understand the past. Part of the history of this island is a revolt of the slaves that overthrew their French masters in 1791. The story of the rebellion revolves around a pact reportedly made with the devil that empowered the slaves in their victorious struggle. Those rejecting this story and the subsequent poverty afflicting the country have no competing explanation of the great disparity between Haiti and the neighboring Dominican Republic. Perhaps they will assign it to corrupt governments and uneducated citizens… certain two common forces hindering prosperity, but not unique to the region.

Actor Danny Glover offered the wisdom gained by years of receiving excessive compensation for pretending to be someone he isn’t. He said the earthquake was the result of the earth’s anger at the failure of the Copenhagen climate change summit. He apparently accepts some sort of mystical connection between the actions of man and the physical earth. One has to wonder why an angry Mother Earth would focus her wrath on the poor Haitians who had nothing to do with the failure of the worlds scheme to get its hands on the wealth of the US.

The press and political types of all philosophical stripes castigated Dr. Robertson for his theory that he presented as he was arranging for more aid to the suffering Haitians than many nations. On the other hand, they barely noticed the foolishness of Glover. The reporting elites may not have subscribed to his exact analysis, but were sure that his heart was in the right place. Good intentions are generally enough for those with insufficient discernment to realize the absurdity of the climate change movement.

So why did we see such a divergent reaction to two views that are not exactly mainstream? As just discussed, those who have consumed the Algorian kool aid are constitutionally incapable of critically assessing their own foolishness. Pat Robertson, on the other hand, is a member of one of the most hated groups in their progressive worldview… Christians.

I don’t know if this calamity is a direct result of the storied deal with the dark side or not. However, I do have an idea of why there is such hostility to his explanation. To accept even the possibility of Robertson being on target, one has to accept the idea first of all, that there is a God who is watching and keeping scores. Next, one has to believe that He is involved in the affairs of men, blessing and sometimes cursing.

Both of these ideas have got to scare the living daylights out of those attempting to live their lives as if these things are were not so. We should understand this thinking and show no surprise. For those who see man as the measure of all things and divine intervention as the product of a deranged or deluded mind, they see such thinking as a sign of instability to be ignored and, at best, tolerated… when the reverse is true.

Matthew 7:6 tells us “Give not that which is holy unto the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.” In seeking to give a possible explanation to his sympathetic audience, Dr. Robertson inadvertently found himself breaking this rule… with the attendant negative response from the both the unrepentant public and Christians unwilling to publicly accept this possibility.

Whether the Haitian people are paying for the sins of their fathers or not, the silence of those who should at least consider the possibility is deafening. Could it be jealousy over the success of his Christian Broadcasting Network, or the idea that real Christians don’t talk in tongues, or one of any number of theological quirks. The Christian community, while it should be working together serving the same God and having pretty much the same goals is fragmented by what can be the silliest of differences, to the detriment of all concerned.

To deny the possibility of such an event is to deny the movement of the creator in the affairs of men. Many will accept this positive involvement as giving our nation an auspicious beginning, but refuse to recognize that there actually are penalties for ignoring His instructions. Maybe we need to look our job as not just defeating our opponents politically, but as opening up the truth to them.